ID 


be* /ay, fvoterf 


756 




sr 


is TWe o- kni*hc>- trust . 



0k*)kt,niO 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



ii mil mil mil i mi 

021 048 364 



penmalipe* 






«r«r r* m 



iHD 9756 
I.S5 
Copy 1 






Is There 



a 



lumber Trust? 



By 

ROBERT SEEL A V 



Reprinted from The Editorial Review, February, ipi2 



$ 



With the Compliments of the Author 

ROBERT SEELAV 

Member of the New York Bar 

New York, N. Y. 

U. S. A. 



J 



ISA) 

WAR 5 19!| 



► 



V 










Is There a Lumber Trust? by Robert Seelav, is a review of 
the lumber trade, as well* as a discussion of the Trust question 
in that industry and contains a thorough analysis of the report 
of the Bureau of Corporations on the timberlands of the coun- 
try, revealing some of the fallacious reasoning and conclusions 
included in the Government report. Among the many contribu- 
tions on the Trust question little has been written in regard to 
the conditions prevailing in the lumber trade. Indeed, the 
writer, who is a practising attorney in New York, of Russian 
birth, and who has for years studied the question and has been 
associated with lumber establishments here and in Europe, 
believes that this is the first attempt to present the subject as 
it deserves to be presented. Every phase is discussed, from the 
relation of the farmer and the mill-man to the consumer-manu- 
facturer, to the problem of conservation and preservation of 
the forests ; also the tendencies of the Lumber Merchants' As- 
sociation, as well as the attitude of the Government toward them 
and the possible remedies against any attempt toward arbitrary 
action by the lumber merchants. Mr. Seelav urges upon the 
Government the taking of immediate steps to restore the vast 
forests that have been razed by the march of settlement and 
civilization, and presents a summed-up substance of the Report 
of the Investigation of the Lumber Trade ordered by a resolu- 
tion of the United States Senate. 

By The Editor 



IS THERE A LUMBER TRUST? 

By Robert Seelav. 



In these days of trade corporations or "Trusts," real and imag- 
inary, one important branch of the tree of commerce has been 
somewhat overlooked. As our newspaper scribes score each 
combination of trade, exposing its methods and waxing warm 
over its inhuman exactions, they seldom mention a "Lumber 
Trust." Recently the press has been dwelling a little on the 
conditions prevailing in that industry, but the general ignorance of 
the outside world as to those conditions makes these criticisms 
somewhat ineffective. Ambitious representatives of the Federal 
Government have lately sought to unearth illegal combinations 
in the lumber trade, but their efforts are the result of public 
clamor against trusts, and of their desire to win laurels as "trust- 
busters." 

The consumer is the one eminently fit to judge of the exist- 
ence or non-existence of a trust or combination controlling a cer- 
tain commodity. With but little calculation, he draws the most 
natural and correct conclusion. With his pay-envelope as a basis, 
he discusses most vividly the complicated trust problem. But the 
average person rarely buys lumber in its rough stage and never 
buys it in such quantities that he will easily observe a systematic 
increase in its price. 

An article purchased in the open market, if it be made in part 
or even entirely of wood, may be higher in price now than at 
any time in the past. But the increase is not attributable to any 
extortion on the part of the lumberman. Many other factors 
have contributed to the higher cost of the article. The actual 
increase on the cost of only the lumber is comparatively slight, 
and the dealer will rarely advance that as the excuse for the in- 
crease. Hence the householder and voter, when philosophizing 
over the higher cost of living and the empty market-basket, in- 
dulges in no particular condemnation of the forest monopoly. 

The price of lumber has, it is true, increased during the last 



: 



ten years, and the manufacturer pays now ten dollars per thou- 
sand feet more than the price paid for the same sort and grade 
about the year 1900. In other words, on every foot of lumber 
the price has been raised one cent. Few articles on the market 
require more than one hundred feet of lumber in their construc- 
tion, or a total increase of one dollar for the entire supply of 
lumber consumed. Now we find that the price of the complete 
article has been advanced a great deal more than one dollar, per- 
haps ten times as much. Looking into the field of construction 
and building, where the lumber and timber consumed often ex- 
exceeds the 100,000 feet mark, we find as well that the actual 
advance on that commodity has been comparatively small in its 
ratio to the entire cost and when considered side by side with 
the other elements of construction. 

If we compare the advance on other products we wonder that 
the lumberman is as lenient as he has been, burdened as he is, 
together with the others, by the alleged extortion of the real 
trusts of this country. The principal item which enters into con- 
sideration of the lumberman is that of freight, in order to bring 
the supply to the centre of population, which includes conveying 
the material to the mill and from the mill to the railroad. Glance 
at the freight bill, the toll levied by the railroad, and you will 
be astounded at the leniency of the lumbermen. The average 
freight bill may be computed at one-third of the full purchase 
price of a carload of lumber, often, as in the case of the low 
grades of North Carolina pine, the lumberman receives $15.00 
per thousand feet and is compelled to pay out to the railroad 
over one-half of that amount for transportation. 

The lumber industry is in the hands of individuals of high 
character and, proportionate to the population, not now numer- 
ous. Yet, a trust within this industry is quite impossible. 
Even a gentleman's agreement, as the term is applied to designate 
an unwritten agreement as to prices, is a remote possibility. 
There are a few organizations within the lumber trade, but, first, 
only a small number of merchants actually join them and, what 
is more important, those so organized are combined only for the 
purposes of protecting the industry from any general attacks; 
they are on the defensive, rather than on the aggressive. 

A great source of annoyance and one requiring the intervention 
of lumbermen's associations is the regulation of grades, which, of 
course, is peculiar to the lumber trade. Each and every board is 

5 



carefully inspected and graded, and vigorous disputes often arise 
as to the standard for grading. This can be decided only by 
properly organized associations, which lay down uniform rules 
for the guidance of the inspectors and the general trade. 

Rarely has the lumber trade known of an association formed 
with the express purpose of "regulating'' prices, even were such 
an object a possibility. The older lumbermen in the City of 
New York still remember the mutual arrangement known as the 
"Spruce Agreement." This act by the lumber merchants was one 
assumed as a matter of urgent necessity. Some of the merchants, 
in order to receive the contracts for the entire supply of wood- 
work and lumber for a building in the course of construction, 
would agree to sell to the builder all the spruce necessary for a 
price much lower than the cost to himself. In fact, the sacrifices 
made on that particular kind of lumber were so severe and 
assumed such seriousness, that the lumber merchants decided to 
give up the foolish competition which served no purpose, and are 
now selling spruce on a fair and reasonable basis. 

Every trade must have its associations for the purposes of main- 
taining its proper code of unwritten ethics and to take such action 
as may be necessary for or against measures that generally affect 
their respective industries. 

There has not been even a semblance of centralization in the 
lumber industry. Any merchant may buy from the small timber- 
land owners their outputs and thus get in and ship down to the 
centres of trade many millions of feet of lumber, although by 
far the larger merchants are those who possess their own tracts 
of timber which they cut down in a careful and systematic method. 
The number of merchants as well as the sources of supply are 
widely scattered. In every state there are thousands of more or 
less considerable tracts of timber lands and it would require a 
fund infinitely greater than that reputed to be invested in the oil 
industry in order to develop a lumber trust of any magnitude. 
The fact is that in the lumber industry the peculiar conditions 
tend against rather than for concentration of interests. In the 
year 1909 there were in this country 46,584 mills, which cut during 
that year 44,509,000,000 feet of lumber, and the largest of them 
did not cut any more than one-half of one per cent, of the total 
output of lumber. It is a practical impossibility to consolidate 
nearly 50,000 mills into one body acting in a dominating, arbitrary 
style. 

6 



In the ownership of standing timber, as distinguished from that 
of lumber ready for the market, there are, to be sure, some vast 
holdings centred in a few owners. In fact, the reports of the 
alleged centralization of timberland ownership prompted the 
United States Senate to pass a resolution instructing the Secre- 
tary of Commerce and Labor to investigate the lumber trade 
in the United States, and the author of the resolution, yielding to 
public clamor, worded it with the following significant expression : 

"The said investigation and inquiry shall be conducted with the 
particular object of ascertaining whether or not there exists among 
any corporations, companies, or persons engaged in the manufacture or 
sale of lumber, any combination, conspiracy, trust, agreement or con- 
tract intended to operate in restraint of lawful trade or commerce in 
lumber, or to increase the market price of lumber in any part of the 
United States." 

The report is either an apology on behalf of the government, 
or a terrible denunciation of the methods adopted previously by 
Federal Administrations in presenting to their favorites all our 
natural resources. 

The substance of the report may be summed up in the table of 
statistics presented therein as follows : 

SUMMARY TABLE. 

Billion 
Feet. 

Grand total 2,826 

Privately owned 2,197 

Investigation area (about 80 per cent) i>747 

Pacific-Northwest 1,013 

Southern Pine Region 634 

Lakes States 100 

Out of investigation area 450 

National Forests owned by Government 539 

Reserved Forests owned by Government and by States 90 

Speaking of the three largest holdings in timber, The Southern 
Pacific Company, The Weyerhauser Timber Company and The 
Northern Pacific Company, who own, together, 238,000,000,000 
feet, the Commissioner says : 

"It is worth pointing out that these three immense holdings were 
virtually made possible by the land grants of the Federal Government 
to great railroad corporations. Practically all of the acreage of the 
Southern Pacific Company was secured through the Government land 
grants. . . . The enormous holding of the Weyerhauser Timber 
Company, aggregating 1,945,000 acres, is based on the Northern Pacific 

7 



land grants . . . Notwithstanding the fact that the timber land 
which it now retains is but a remnant of its original holding, the com- 
pany (Northern Pacific) nevertheless ranks third in the list of the 
country's timber owners. 

"The character of the Northern Pacific's timber, and, in consequence, 
that of the Weyerhauser Timber Company, was considerably improved 
through the 'forest lieu' legislation. This was a provision included 
in an appropriation act of June i, 1897, which allowed a settler or 
owner (thus including land-grant railroads), whose lands fell within 
the boundaries of a forest reserve, to exchange such lands for an equal 
area to be selected from unoccupied and non-mineral lands anywhere 
in the public domain ; these selections were subsequently restricted to 
surveyed lands. Under this legislation (since repealed) the Northern 
Pacific made very extensive relinquishments of poor land within the 
national forests, securing an equal acreage, selected for timber value, 
elsewhere in the public domain. 

"A special lieu-selection law affecting the Northern Pacific was passed 
in connection with the creation of Mount Rainier National Park by 
act of March 2, 1899. This provided for the relinquishment of the 
Northern Pacific lands within the national park area and within the 
Pacific Forest Reserve, giving the railroad the privilege of selection 
of surveyed or unsurveyed non-mineral lands in any State into which 
it extended. Under this act, the railroad relinquished over 500,000 
acres, obtaining in exchange heavily timbered lands in other portions of 
the Northwest, of which at least 300,000 acres was sold to the Weyer- 
hauser Timber Company and to other companies in which the Weyer- 
hauser family is interested. 

"This 'forest-lieu' legislation was intended to enable the Government 
to regain as much land as possible for reservation in compact blocks, 
and to enable the settlers within the forest reserve limits, who so de- 
sired, to re-locate where the settlement of country would not be ar- 
rested by such wholesale withdrawals. By the actual working of this 
legislation, however, a large amount of comparatively worthless land 
was returned to the Government by the Northern Pacific Railway Com- 
pany, which obtained in exchange an equal amount of excellent timbered 
land. Thus, while the land-grant legislation largely made possible such 
immense single holdings as those of the Southern Pacific, Weyerhauser, 
and the Northern Pacific Companies, this 'forest-lieu' legislation resulted 
in improving the character of the Northern Pacific lands (including 
those sold to the Weyerhauser Timber Company and other companies 
in which the Weyerhauser family is interested), and consequently 
increased their value, through the privilege of making selection in 
heavily timbered regions on the relinquishment of much less valuable 
land, or even comparatively worthless land within forest reserve limits. 

"Only forty years ago at least three-fourths of the timber now 
standing was publicly owned. Now about four-fifths is privately owned." 

The report adds: 

"Such laws were wholly inappropriate to forest regions. ... In 

8 



theory they were intended to distribute the public lands in small tracts 
as homes for freeholders. In fact, they actually furthered timber 
concentration in vast holding." 

The settlers, it appears, who under the "Timber and Stone 
Act," received valuable land for a nominal price, $1.25 per acre, 
did not cultivate it, but sold it outright to a few individuals, who 
sought the timber land purely for speculative purposes and are 
now retaining the claims for the benefits to be derived when the 
price of lumber is exceedingly high. 

In the popular understanding a Trust is a combination con- 
trolling a market in the strict sense of the word. We connect 
with the term "Trust" a systematic effort, by a few, to stifle any 
competition. Some large combinations have been accused of 
adopting measures that fall very close to the criminal in the 
attempts to concentrate the trade in their own hands. This is 
not true of the lumber trade. 

But even these vast holdings do not loom up threateningly on 
the horizon in a manner worthy of caricature as an all-devouring 
octopus. The holdings of the Southern Pacific Company, which 
on their face appear like a huge, formidable monopoly, are not, 
in fact, nearly so menacing as they may seem by such showing. 
Assume that this railroad owns outright a tract which will yield, 
according to data supplied by the Government, 106,000,000,000 
feet of lumber, or six per cent of the entire supply of the country. 
Now, the Southern Pacific itself will have consumed during the 
next fifty years over 10,000,000,000 feet of lumber, employed 
daily for its own uses and purposes. In other words, at the end 
of that period, when, it is predicted, the crisis in the lumber 
supply is reached, the Southern Pacific Company will have con- 
sumed for its own exclusive purposes 10,000,000,000 feet of its 
reserved timber. This portion must therefore be excluded from 
any consideration of the amount of lumber alleged to be with- 
drawn from the market for monopoly or control of the trade. 

The amount of the timber said to be held by the three largest 
owners will reach the total of eleven per cent, of the entire* 
supply in the United States. The Government Commissioner 
admits that in reaching this total he did not limit himself to the 
actual holdings of these three owners, but included in this total 
the holdings of others, friends and relatives of the Weyer- 
hausers, who, in his opinion, may some day act in accord with 
the desires and plans of the larger holders. 



It is inconceivable how the holders of eleven per cent, of the 
supply of a commodity can possibly become an arbitrary trust, 
even assuming that they will all act in unison, or, how the 
holder of six per cent, of such a commodity can loom up as 
frightfully as some will depict him. 

Should the occasion arise, the system of reforestation can 
always be employed to combat or to forestall any attempt to con- 
trol the supply or price of lumber. Again, there are wide 
stretches of timber land throughout Canada, Mexico, the Indies, 
and the Philippines, and millions of miles of it in South America 
which, in time of urgent need, can be utilized in spite of the dif- 
ficulties in the cutting and of the transportation of the lumber 
to distant points. The countries of Europe do not hesitate to 
import from this country countless shiploads of lumber. Why 
can not we import from our neighboring lands? The kinds of 
lumber thus imported can be put to the exact uses to which we 
now employ our home-grown species. The sorts of lumber 
produced in Mexico, for instance, can easily supplant some of 
our own kinds. Chico-zapote or red ebony will take the place 
of maple for floors or bowling alleys, and for other purposes, and 
would prove a remarkably good substitute for the domestic 
lumber used for railroad ties. "Juspkin" will take the place 
of white wood. "Ceibo" and "Bary" are similar to our oak, 
and "Hoves" is richer in color than quartered oak or even ma- 
hogany. "Guapaque" may be well used for wagon hubs and 
other articles. In fact, the many sorts and kinds of lumber 
growing in the Southern countries, some of which have not yet 
been experimented with, if imported and brought to this country 
can be employed equally well as the domestic sorts and thus 
prevent any form of monopoly that may be attempted by any 
number of individuals. 

The Government Commissioner deplores the fact and advanced 
it as a reason to prove his allegations of monopoly, that while 
the Pacific Northwest has five-elevenths of this country's privately 
owned standing timber, it supplies only one-sixth of the annual 
cut. The Commissioner adds that there is a strong effort being 
made to preserve the timber until the country shall face a crisis, 
and the price rises to a prohibitive figure ; the price of "stumpage" 
or standing timber is now high enough to discourage further 
transfers. The Pacific Northwest can not produce any more 
than one-sixth of the lumber supply. The freight on its lumber, 



10 



if shipped to Eastern ports, would more than consume the profits 
derived, and this limits their field of activity to a certain territory, 
the Western and Northern States. Then, it must be remembered, 
that the Pacific Northwest produces only one species of lumber in 
abundance, Douglas Fir. That section of the country can not 
level any more Fir than is demanded. Hence the "complaint" 
of the Government disappears without a possibility of resurrec- 
tion. 

On the other hand, it is probably a blessing for this country 
to have the supply of lumber reasonably withheld and limited. 
The dearer a commodity, the less of it is consumed, and the less 
of it wasted. In the lumber trade in particular, the waste per- 
petrated by the manufacturers is abnormally high. In every sort 
and description of lumber, in boards, flooring, shingles or logs, 
there may be found various grades — as many as twenty different 
grades in some species of lumber or its products. When the 
price is high a lower grade can be utilized, otherwise the higher 
grades are more in demand and the cheaper or lower grades are 
permitted to decay and become useless. 

The present value of the privately owned standing timber of 
the United States, 2,197,000,000,000 feet, is estimated at $6,000,- 
000,000, or an average of $2.75 per thousand feet of "stumpage." 
Our annual consumption of timber is about 50,000,000,000 feet, 
while replacement by new growth is only about one-third, and 
at this rate our timber lands will be entirely consumed in about 
fifty-five years. Unless stringent efforts are made by the Gov- 
ernment to make the replacement equal to the consumption, the 
next generation will face not only a famine but an actual and dis- 
tressing absence of any kind of lumber, even for its most urgent 
uses. 

In the wave of excitement that spread over the country follow- 
ing the decision of the United States Court in the Standard Oil 
and American Tobacco cases, the lumber trade received its quota 
of sensational rebuke. The newspapers set up a straw figure 
which was labelled "Lumber Trust" and devoted its precious 
columns to the task of ripping open this figure, without revealing 
that its insides are mere straw. The press of the country is 
working up hysterically a spirit of antagonism towards all trade 
associations and, of course, the lumber trade cannot remain 
immune from these attacks. 

In response to this general demand of our public-spirited edi- 

11 



tors, the Department of Justice instituted suit against all the 
lumbermen's associations to dissolve their organizations and thus 
remove their legal standing. The lumbermen are charged with 
attempting, 

"to close the door of the wholesale dealer and manufacturer in all parts 
of the United States to the consumer, and arbitrarily and unreasonably 
deprive such manufacturer and wholesaler, as aforesaid, of the trade of 
the consumer residing in the territory covered by the retail dealers' 
trade ..." 

The allegations of the Government complaint allege that the 
Lumbermen's Associations have unduly and "unreasonably" re- 
strained and prohibited the lumber trade in a manner and style 
which bring them within the prohibition outlined in the Sherman 
Anti-Trust Law. The facts submitted, which took the Govern- 
ment agents so long to uncover, have been well known and 
obvious to everybody else for the last ten years. Restraint of 
trade is the act of holding back or hindering certain competitors 
from indulging and exercising their true rights and for the pur- 
pose of bringing into the coffers of certain firms, additional and 
improper benefits and emoluments. The restraint charged in the 
complaint against the lumbermen is that the wholesalers have 
agreed not to sell to such of the consumers who, in the ordinary 
course of trade, should properly patronize the retailers. The 
world over, and in every branch of commerce, the manufacturer or 
wholesaler, if he is at all in harmony with the fellow members of 
his trade, will give his customers, or retailers, as they are known, 
a certain field of activity, free and unrestrained. If the whole- 
sale lumbermen will sell their stock directly to the consumer he 
can easily afford to dispose of it at a very much reduced price, 
and earn, at the same time, a fair profit, thus cutting out com- 
pletely the middleman, who is compelled to buy from the whole- 
saler. The act of the Lumber Trade Association in restricting 
the wholesalers is a benevolent act, absolutely essential for the 
general welfare of all, and is a step taken not to the betterment, 
but to the detriment of the wholesalers, who lose millions of 
dollars by this arrangement and restriction. Restraint of trade, 
such as would make a person guilty of crime, is, naturally, an 
act which will inure to his benefit and will increase his profits. 
But an act which results in a material loss of money to him for 
the purpose of giving the opportunity of an ordinary profit to the 
smaller business man, is not restraint of trade, but release of 

12 



trade in every sense of the word, and is an act to be commended 
and not condemned. 

In the city of Chicago, charges have been made against the 
Retail Lumber Dealers' Association, in which it is alleged that 
they have succeeded in influencing the wholesalers to withhold and 
refuse the sale of any lumber to the mail-order houses. Perhaps 
it is only a question, in that particular city, as to who is more 
powerful and wields more influence with the powers that be, the 
lumberman or the mail-order business man. The charge seems 
to be more a matter of spite and revenge; is purely local; and 
everyone in the trade has had full knowledge of these disputes for 
a number of years past. That the wholesalers have refused to 
sell any lumber to the mail-order houses, which are in direct 
competition with the retailers, is a well-known fact, and is directly 
in line with their policy of protecting the middleman, or retailer, 
in his effort to ply his trade with a reasonable and fair degree of 
profit. No one can find any trace of viciousness nor any breach 
of business ethics in the fact that the wholesalers, while losing 
large sums of money by that act, protect the smaller man who 
needs and deserves such protection. 

Strange as it may seem, the cloud that threatens danger to us is 
due not to the presence of large capital, but rather to the absence 
of it. It has occurred to many of us that, more and more, forests 
are sold and transferred to foreign syndicates, while our own 
investors sink their capital into imaginary bonanzas rather than 
into the real wealth of the forests. 

An excellent tract of timber land is presented by an owner for 
the purpose of securing a purchaser, and the Wall Street broker 
who interested himself in the proposition, though controlling 
millions in American capital, communicates, instead, with London 
for an offer on that timber land. Bankers throughout the city 
have at their disposal millions 'of dollars of foreign capital with 
instructions to invest in timber lands in the United States or in 
pulp wood and mahogany anywhere in North America. 

Foreign capital does not manipulate. It stores away its mil- 
lions in safe and sane enterprises, and there is nothing so certain 
in increased value and development as the products of the forest. 

A certain newspaper owner is reputed to be worth many mil- 
lions of dollars. One of his enterprises is the manufacture of all 
the necessary paper from the spruce lumber. Take the map of 
Newfoundland and draw a line about his holdings in timber lands, 

13 



and note how careful he has been to monopolize the best portion 
obtainable; this enterprise requires no marvelous ingenuity — just 
an investment, and an appreciation of the possibilities in it. But 
this journalist is not an American, just a "slow" Englishman, 
while our own Yankee journalists are desperately righting paper 
dealers, contending for lower tariff, raising the price of subscrip- 
tions and experiencing no little difficulty with the supply of paper 
— all this, with that great territory of spruce within distance. 

The word "conservation" has become the talk of the day. It 
has been made popular by the long and heated controversies of a 
few ex-office holders who made "conservation of the forests" 
their platform for public approval. 

The Forest Service of the Federal Department of Agriculture 
has accomplished, in a measure, a great deal towards the protec- 
tion of the forests. Large tracts of timber land have been re- 
served, that the timber upon them may develop freely, until, in 
the opinion of the authorities, the merchant may be permitted to 
turn the trees into articles of commerce. The lumber trade has 
entertained great doubts as to the possibility of finding a person 
qualified to use the sense and discretion essential in the important 
work of designating and guiding the work of reservation. Wide 
experience and infinite knowledge, as well as a deep consideration 
both for the people and the lumber trade, are absolutely necessary. 

In every State, as well, there is an efficient Department of 
Agriculture and Forestry, and everywhere there have been wide 
reservations and numerous reforestations. 

Reforestation is more important and essential than reservation. 
Millions of young trees should replace the stumps and barren 
places that cover the hillsides. In thirty to forty years the little 
saplings will be fair, though not very stout trees, and will pro- 
duce boards of ordinary width. But at the end of fifty or sixty 
years, the trees will be developed and produce the finest lumber. 

Instead of finding fault with one another, inciting needless 
prosecutions and controversies, let us pay more attention and lend 
more strength to our Forestry Service and work for the improve- 
ment of our great, beautiful and indispensable forests. 




14 



In connection with the foregoing article The Editorial Review re- 
printed the following editorial from the New York Lumber Trade Journal. 




AN APPEAL TO REASON. 



The harshest criticism and the one most justified is that of 
the government's silence concerning a lumber trust. 

The daily press and periodicals generally and almost without 
exception are continually harping on a lumber trust. Every car- 
toon that caricatures the trusts has the lumber trust in with the 
rest. 

And yet 

There is no Lumber Trust 

and 

THE GOVERNMENT KNOWS IT. 

The Department of Commerce and Labor in an investigation 
which has cost tens of thousands of dollars of the people's 
money, knows it. 

The Department of Justice in an investigation which has cost 
tens of thousands of dollars of the people's money, knows it. 

WE KNOW THEY KNOW IT. 

Therefore we submit 

That the government is entirely unfair in allowing it to be 
understood to the contrary. 

Such suits as the government is bringing is against local con- 
ditions and there is no trust feature involved in the contention ; 
on the contrary the whole attitude of the associations interested 
is distinctly anti-trust. 

Further, we submit: 

That the government is not only unfair, but that it should be 
above any such petty intrigue. 

We know nothing about the manner in which the Department 
of Justice has been treated elsewhere, but we challenge it to con- 
tradict that in the east it has met other than with the greatest 
frankness. 

i5 



MA-fl 5 i912 




021 048 364 



Then why can not the Department be equally frank? 

Is it possible it is not willing to fight on its merits ? 

A New York daily recently said editorially : 

"Can the Lumber Trust and the Paper Trust defeat reciproc- 
ity ?" 

Why not be fair and tell the people that the Lumber Trust is 
not trying to defeat anything, for there is no Lumber Trust. 
Why allow the public mind to be poisoned when it is vital to the 
cause of justice that it should be unbiased? 

Why be petty ? 

Why not be big and manly and fair? 

The lumber trade, as a trade, is not to be blamed because there 
are many manufacturers who think a tariff on lumber a necessity 
and are putting up a fight for it. 

These manufacturers who are agreed on this part are not in 
a trust; they control nothing except themselves individually, and 
if they are agreed on the tariff proposition they are not in accord 
on much of anything else and especially as to prices, and they 
have not as much resemblance to a trust as a jack rabbit has to 
a mule. 

And so we say to Mr. Wickersham and to Mr. Knox, and above 
all to the President, Mr. Taft: be fair, be open and above board, 
and come out now and tell the people what you know — and that is : 

THERE IS NOT A SHADOW OF A LUMBER TRUST. 



16 



LIBRARY OF INGRESS 



021 048 364 



penmaiife© 
pH8.5 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



021 048 364 



peamaLifc* 



